Can You Trust Early Reviews? - Charts with Dan!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 вер 2024
- Following Wonder Woman 1984's review freefall, a lot of you asked - can early critics' reviews be trusted? I dug through years of data to see if there are any clues buried in recent box office history and to see if early critics really do give more positive reviews than ones who see movies later!
SUBSCRIBE TO MY PODCAST - All My Movies: apple.co/3deJpUm
JOIN ME ON PATREON: / danmurrell
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER: / murrelldan
FOLLOW ME ON INSTAGRAM: / murrelldan
For a show called "Charts" this episode really delivered on the number of charts. Thanks for all the hard work.
The deep dive of “what about this, ok, what about that?”. This was really fascinating
A 45-minute Dan video? Pump this into my veins NOW.
💉
Amen!
Hmm, I thought the strange pattern in critical reception might be due to WW1984 being a sequel of a well-received film. Considering that the movie with the closest pattern was also a disappointing sequel perhaps that would be something to look into.
Also, love these deep dives.
agreed
Good point @Ermiece ! I think its also possible because, as Dan discussed, these critics love film so much the fact they got to go to a cinema for a big budget release after not being able to for so long, made the experience way better for them. Then the critics who I think mostly saw it at home? came along and saw the movie without that cinema experience. Basically because pandemic.
@@jameskelly4303 This and also much of the negativity came from people of colour and minorities. The initial reviews were mostly just white dudes pining over how hot Gadot is, once more people saw it and saw how problematic it was, that's when it dropped.
@@Ailieorz that’s not true at all
Dude I've been wondering what happened to you for like 9 months, and your wandavision review popped up in my recommended I guess because I was binging wandavision reviews. Let me say I am so glad to see that you have your own channel and I am so far watching and liking every video that I can to try to support you.
I think a lot of this has to do with Reviewers' suspension of disbelief. There are plenty of movies, especially in the blockbuster genre, whose fun, action, spectacle, and other entertainment value, plaster over some plot and pacing flaws for the viewer.
Consider a movie like Captain America: Civil War. Seeing it in the theater is amazing. It's only when you have time later to think about it that you realize the massive plot holes and have your suspension of disbelief broken. On the other hand, with Rise of Skywalker, the jumps in logic broke my suspension of disbelief and no amount of spectacle could distract me from it, even on first viewing. Obviously, this will vary a bit depending on the viewer, etc, but you get the point. If a movie keeps your suspension of disbelief intact during the initial viewing experience, you'll normally come away with an overall positive impression.
However, Wonder Woman had a viewer base that could pause, rewind, and discuss in real-time in a way that is not possible with a normal theater-going experience. Combined with intense internet discourse around the film's launch, the dissemination of information around the movie may have sabotaged it. I'm not saying that this was intentional, or malicious, or anything like that. But if a reviewer sees a comment on their twitter feed saying "why does Cheetah get two wishes?!", then that reviewer is much more likely to notice that flaw when watching the film. I think this movie was close enough to the proverbial boundary of suspension of disbelief, that I think the buzz about the films flaws were enough to spoil the first impression of reviewers who saw the film later.
Just my theory. Thoughts?
I love what you said in the third paragraph and it brought up some good food for thought! How will film studios, directors, writers, and pretty much EVERYONE involved in a film's creation and release deal with streaming-only if the industry does make that shift? Like you mentioned, seeing a (brand new, sci-fi/adventure) film in which you can play, pause, and discuss or pick apart in real-time might actually shatter the ability suspend one's disbelief when compared to theater releases.
With some sci-fi and comic book titles, people don't see the plotholes (or realize that they were complete duds) until they get home and think about it or see it again on a streaming platform. Skipping straight to that might be harmful to these (or maybe even all) film genres..
Sure having access to social media before, during, and after seeing a film does have an effect on the viewing experiences (if the audience cannot set aside pre-determined bias), but I think streaming-only releases will have a bigger impact on general reviews than seeing a couple tweets or RT scores.
2/9/21, 11:34a
XD.
" If a movie keeps your suspension of disbelief intact during the initial viewing experience, you'll normally come away with an overall positive impression." I think there is some truth to that thesis. One aspect is the plot itself; does it make sense? But I would another factor which - especially for movies that rely on (big) action set pieces - should alo be taken into account and that is how convincing are the action sequences. Let's take for example MI:Fallout which does not do anything special in the plot department but the action sequences are incredible because they do not look fake.. Same goes for MM:Fury Road. Compare this to a movie like FF:7 or FF8 which both suffer from bad writing and unconvincing action sequences lokking like a video game.
I think it would be interesting to do a similar rotten tomato breakdown focusing on sequels. I have a theory that bad sequels of good movies might start off with higher scores due to critics assuming it will be similarly good, but will have their scores lowered when people start discussing their flaws more.
Thats why I was waiting for Last Jedi. That one fits the bill perfectly. I was actually surprised to see how well reviewed it was. I'd forgotten about that.
It’s not a bad sequel, certainly not to me.
No, it is a very bad sequel, especially when one factors in that it is supposed to be the middle act of a three part story. However, it is well acted, beautifully shot, and, if looked at independently, not a bad film. Which is why I think critics like it, since they're mostly focused on just it, but a lot of Star Wars fans dislike it, because they care about the greater whole.
@@Axterix13 I think Last Jedi is still a garbage film even taken independently. Fin's story line was pointless, contrived and contributed nothing to the narrative. Poe's wasn't much better. Ray / Luke / Kylo storyline was good, but that still leaves the narrative being 2/3rds garbage in my opinion.
@@Axterix13 That's exactly what I think about TLJ. As a standalone film it's great (except Canto Bite, which is a big waste of time), but as a middle chapter of a trilogy it's awful.
Palpatine coming to episode 9 only proves this, which is why I haven't seen TROS (even though it's free).
Could you consider coming back to the debate game? Maybe instead of debating other people, just make a argument for or against something in the movie business and/or movies in general. I miss your rhetorical talents and rants from Movie Fights and perhaps others do too.
I agree with this!
Definitely! Dan's one of the few people who can be emotionally invested in an argument and still present his ideas logically. It's a great balance
Dan, have you consider mediocre or bad sequels to good popular movies? Maybe there you will see your patern...
Came for the numbers, stayed for the impassioned speech about how movie critics are the biggest movie fans of all. Never change, Dan!
Are they really though? There's so many 'critics' out there who seem more interested in being popular and getting clicks than those who are interested in the actual film craft.
@@budthecyborg4575 Agreed, there are 'popular' critics, and actual critics. There's daylight between the people who think that because they see a lot of movies that their opinion matters, vs those who actually understand and are passionate about the craft.
I wonder what the data would show if we looked at the sequels where the original movies carried a lot of good will. Though the release context in which WW1984 came out, especially the simultaneous drop on HBO Max, definitely played a role as well.
I think you're on to something with looking at sequels. How many times have you heard somebody talking about a sequel, and literally the first thing they say is "well it wasn't as good as the original". While that might be true, it doesn't tell you if the sequel is a good film. Using Wonder Woman as an example, the original is definately better, but 1984 was still good when judged on its own merits. There seems to be a feeling that sequels have to be bigger and better, and "good", just isn't good enough.
Finally a bit of data to shut up the people that think studios trawl through previous reviews from reviewers and restrict access based on favorability. Absolutely insane. Just cant handle people liking a film
I think you're right on the money in your final summation: maybe early review critics are just finding a bit more to enjoy (I would even submit the fact that they are the most unspoiled perspectives before having the wider audience influence the conversation, potentially skewing perspectives). People questioning credibility by suggesting critics are afraid of losing access sounds like a bad faith argument made by wannabe critics who are jealous they don't have that access.
Just because someone liked or disliked something doesn’t mean either one are wrong for doing so. I’m sure everyone agrees with this, but then why do people always get pissed off when critics review things?
You mean the fans or the creatives?
Cause we all define ourselves by the things we like. When people say things we like aren’t good, we see it as an attack on ourselves. It’s a a bummer we do that and personally I’ve been trying to get away from that, but it’s hard af.
Because they think they have ulterior motives (erroneously)
@@BirdsElopeWithTheSun09 If critics all judged things the same then we'd only need to hear from one critic every time a move came out. If you like fight scenes like the guy who gave that review maybe you'd think the same, so long as he mentioned the other things that the movie had to offer. He may have just found the other stuff boring and of little substance while other people didn't.
In any case there's little reason to get mad over a review, it's ultimately a subjective cake topped with some objective sprinkles. Disagree/correct respectfully and move on with your day.
@@forwhy8723 anybody
Great work Dan! I think you did a report on RT a few years ago about what the tomato meter actually means and since then I have taken that score with a mountain of salt. If I were reviewing movies there would be a lot of movies that I would give a positive tomato rating but would say are not good movies as I view the tomato score as "was it enjoyable?"
Breaking news : Critic claims that critics aren't biased. Just kidding. Love your content as always Dan. A very thorough breakdown.
Honestly... since I am so lazy, Dan could have just made up all those numbers and drawn them with crayon and I would have believed them anyways. I'm not going to bother checking them lol.
I think that hype might be a significant factor in the generally lower release day reviews. When expectations are subverted or not met, some people's gut reaction might be to write a negative review to vent. Once the dust has settled and people generally know what to expect, reviews return to normal.
Id love to get 100 professional reviewers to write down their definition for what 50/100 70/100 and 90/100 means how good it is.
Then get them to read each others descriptions and then talk it over and come up with a universal understanding so all use the same definitions of how good a 50/100 actually is.
As it is think each critic invent their own grade system and then everyone use the same numbers but what those numbers represent is not at all the same.
Edit: thank you for the deep dive. Liked the graphs
Good analysis. Thank you. I was a member of the original team that created Rotten Tomatoes, and one of the biggest challenges was helping people understand the process for collecting reviews, and the most common misconception was that we were stacking reviews for certain films or that we had some personal interest in the final results/tomatometer of a film. (The results are interesting on their own so we never felt a need to adjust them based on some made-up motivation or imaginary benefit. lol.) Thanks for providing a great analysis and understanding of how the tomatometer changes based on adjustments in critical perceptions and how different rounds of review submissions can alter things pretty substantially.
They’re the greatest at their game
Jordan, Brady, Pele, Federer, Gretzky, Phelps, Secretariat, Ruth and Murrell
Pelé over Messi?
Definitely Pelé over anyone.
I agree. Ruth Bader Ginsberg definitely aced the judging game :)
Pele is the biggest con in world football. One of the best in world football? Yes but Pele, Santos and Brazil creating there own rules and records for him. It’s not a good luck.
No chance has there ever been a better pair of footballers than Messi and Ronald. We’re just looking to have witnessed them together.
Finally! Can’t wait to dive in the amazing research.
Man do I appreciate all the numbers you run and the details you get into. Thanks for doing all the work!
It’s interesting that while Chinese New Year is coming up this Friday and it’s so kind of an anniversary it’s actually already more than a year since the last Chinese New Year. Since chinese new year is according to the lunar new year it dates changes and last year it was January 25th and this year it’s February 12th. So if it feels like it has been longer than year, it actually has ;-)
WW84 was the first real tentpole blockbuster (I don't count Tenet) released after the pandemic really got going, and was also the first such movie *ever* released simultaneously on a watch-all-you-want home Pay-TV movie service. It perhaps shouldn't be super surprising that the mass psychology driving its review performance ended up looking rather unique.
I'd agree with this. Plus it had so much hype going into it I think a lot of people just glossed over some of the negative aspects.
@@Ailieorz Well, I'd got the other way. Once it actually came out people didn't have the psychological support behind it of actually having spent money specifically to see it and only it. So it was being judged in comparison to everything else available on HBO, not in isolation like a typical release.
This video may have taken longer to prepare but da~mn...it was worth the wait! Not only was the analysis super comprehensive, the interpretation that critics may be over-enthusiastic rather than corrupt was a wonderful revelation.
Dan out here doing the lord’s work
I can just imagine the studio heads watching this video and taking notes because they never bothered to collect and analyize this data. Dan is just next level here.
Definitely think you can trust early reviews you just can’t trust early consensus scores. I have 4-5 reviewers whose taste resonate with my own. Chris Stuckmann, Dan Murrell, Perri Nemiroff, Jeremy Jahns, all bring a different approach but who’s reviews tend to paint a good picture on a film.
I think the individual review is always the better way than seeing a RT score for example as it doesn’t really tell you anything
I think that's the key too - listening to different POVs that you can trust on the same movie.
I wish there was an easy way to find which critics match your opinion well. So that you know which critics you should follow. It isn't that hard to build, but the hard thing is that you need to get all the data/review scores from all the critics
Considering people like movies for very different reasons, I completely agree with the "listen to the reviewer- approach instead of just clinging to numbers. Numbers, however, are definitely fun to analyze and for spotting trends in the industry
@@NorthernSeaWitch I don’t think it’s an echo chamber at all. While I tend to align more with these reviewers they often expose me to films I wouldn’t have heard about otherwise. There’s obviously other reviewers that are great too but these are my 4 go to and it’s not like they all always love the same movie so it great to hear all their thoughts. My point was specifically around the RT consensus number versus reviewers you tend to trust and that only comes after years of watching their reviews
@@joeriandroog1925 agreed for me the ones I listed I have been following for years now that’s why they have become go toos
There must be something to early critics seeing movies before there are any other opinions or consensus out there. Later critics have a chance to see a variety of opinions which could affect their own. Maybe early WW84 critics just thought it was dumb fun and didn't think too much about it, whereas later critics had time to digest its many problems. Interesting regardless, and great video.
I did not think this would be interesting to me, but I found all of this super fascinating. Well done putting this together and taking the time to do so much research!
I'm really amazed how different Dan's early review of ww84 was from fandoms early review. Not throwing shade just the fandom review was so glowing and most others were so measured at best.
That's exactly what many of us are pointing out. Reviews for these tentpole movies are so hyped up, then when more people see it and realise it's not that great. Why? That's unfortunately not what these numbers are answering
I'd actually kill to see the LOTR movies on the big screen, I was just a little too young when they were airing so never got to experience it.
It was an amazing experience for sure, all three times.
I'm the kind of person who, when the media/other fans of my favourite sports teams really hates a specific player that I like, I'll analyse the stats to see if the numbers actually show good or bad performance. So I really find this kind of deep dive analysis, investigating different theroies, to be very interesting. Thanks for the hard work Dan :)
Kinda surprised to not see Dan look into sequels and their reviews.
Yknow, as a data analyst who loves this movies, this is probably my favorite charting ever.
The only thing I'd like to see further is maybe on a per critic basis. We check for each of the early critics, what their history on female lead or superhero movies were. Maybe its possible that this specific pool of early critics who reviewed Wonder Woman are historically more enthusiastic about the genre, so much so as to boost more than the average "early critic boost"
I enjoyed hearing your analysis of the reviews, you even answered questions about specific films that I wondered about. Great work! Much appreciated!
Keep in mind with Joker that it was shown at film festivals before general release. I'm guessing that in general gives a movie a bump (I can't think of any movie that was more loved out of festival than in).
GREAT video! I loved the deep dive on the numbers as well as your final take on the critics who want all movies to be great.
Awe yeah! Been looking forward to this one. Haven’t even watched it yet and want to say thanks for doing it.
An excellent deepdive into statistics and wasnt boring.
Always kind of gets my back up a bit when "critics are the biggest movie fans" is mentioned. It's like the "real gamer" argument that pops up. In my mind if you love any kind/number of movies then you can be a big movie fan. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for all the numbers 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
I wonder how the grudge towards Warner (regarding the 2021 simultaneous releases on HBO Max) played a part on those reviews...
Great video as always Dan. Got me thinking back to the night before the review embargo dropped for Fant4stic (2015). I can actually recall reading a couple of early comments praising it as a bold new game changer for the superhero genre... so I guess you'd call that a sudden shift in tone.
My biggest surprise was that he didn’t do Birds of Prey.
We went from the NFL Superbowl to the Charts With Dan Superbowl🤯😁
episode deserves more views, fantastic work as always
I found this very informative. I would love to see these 5 stage breakdowns for future movies that come out as part of charts with Dan or maybe even as its own weekly spot.
A+ movie critic with mad Excel skills. Those are truly a rare breed
I like what you did here. No BS. It gives a completely different perspective to see a film's life-long review scores as opposed to the static current score. This might be something you should pitch to the RT staff that their coders implement. Maybe even to the extent that a user could pick three or four movies at once and superimpose their results on the same graph for comparison.
These line graphs are very interesting...
I would be VERY interested for a sequel video to this one discussing the rise of shill accusations and how that is a social phenomenon which has been impacted by greater and greater internet access and the rise of social media. It's an interesting manifestation of conspiratorial thinking that actually may impact the film review or even filmmaking businesses.
As far as those launch day reviews being higher are concerned, I think there are two important factors. The first is that the studios like to make those early access pre-release showings an event. They seek to create a positive environment, knows that this will in turn reflect in the reviews. The second is that it probably isn't critics being extra positive to keep access, but rather studios do some cherry-picking when it comes to the critics they invite. Not majorly, but to some degree. They need/want the big names, the ones associated with major outlets to be included, so they cannot completely bias things, and they know that they can only use the system for as long as the majority of the population is willing to rely on reviews. But if you're doing a super-hero movie, you might well want to invite a reviewer who is more in that niche. Not only are they more likely to get what you are doing, but they are also more likely to be the ones who speak to the segment of the audience your movie is likely to appeal to. And beyond those reviewers, there are those known for "loving movies", by which I mean being far more favorable in their reviews, in general, not that they actually love movies as a medium more than their more critical brethren. And so those types of reviewers will get an invite, so that their reviews are done early, and then a quote from one of them can be used in the advertising.
Love this research, and your suggestion that early critics see the best in movies generally. That was my thought; that because early critics may be looking at more aspects overall, especially technical ones, than the general audience and less experienced reviewers do they tend towards higher ratings.
My thought about the WW swings is that 1) bc critics were happy to be finally reviewing WW84 especially in the time of 'Rona, their happiness in general translated to their ratings being higher, and 2) I think the general trend is that the longer ppl have to wait for a movie to see it, their reviews have a higher bias factor since they have time to incorporate ideas from early reviews. And when the reviews are positive, ppl's expectations are higher. I think that's also a factor in late reviews being more positive for movies that earlier reviewers dislike, expectations are lower so they can enjoy it more.
I really liked this video. I liked numbers, facts and figures and the data to back it up. You were very through and flexible in your reviews. *Two Thumbs up*
Well worth the wait!! Love the data, I work in science so I'm a bit bias. Your hard work and enthusiasm on this really shines through.
The Lego movie blindsided me as well, thought it would be a fun, junk-food movie, but damn did it work out so perfectly.
The first time I heard about Coronavirus was in charting, I'm not sure if you happy to know that
I think a large part of it was the joy of seeing a big-budget, mediocre but fun movie after a long drought of anything like that! I would've been interested to see if Tenet had a similar pattern.
If I remember correctly, I think Tenet might have had such a bizarre staggered global release, that it might be difficult to even tell what counts as pre-release or post release, or what was the release day?
So what I’ve learned today is that critics who review movies on opening day are really grumpy. 😂
Another fantastic episode. Great deep dive. Could do with a few more reviews though. A review of Space Sweepers would be great. Also discovered your podcast Dan which I'm going through slowly.
I think it's less about credibility and more that people who watched it early had unadulterated experience without any Buzz
This, for sure. The whole backlash and counter-backlash culture is exhausting.
Also, early reviews that hype (or crap on) a movie always set expectations and a bar for comparison.
But then you would expect those day one reviews to be skewed by the people who came before. You would expect those scores to be similar, and for the week after release scores to have the greatest dip or change, as the general opinion about the movie is formed, but that is when you see the rebound.
That was amazing! What an awesome deep dive! 👏
What if the higher early reviews could also be a product of less influence by other options out there. The fact that most of the movies recovered after the negative release day could mean that as the reviews stabilize they tend to be near the embargo score.
Interesting. I kind of noticed this pattern within several reviews such as the Birds of Prey for example, a film that had a load of positive reviews after its embargo until it slowly dropped. This is why sometimes whenever I see early positive reviews, I tend to get rather nervous.
Thank you so much for doing this hard work. I have had so many discussions about this to "fans" that most verified reviews are usually in line with the audiences.
I don't know if the numbers back me up on this, but I feel like the factors that lead to WW84's pattern may have been 1-huge hype, 2-impressive visual spectacle, and then 3-rampant plot holes pissing you off the more you think about it
Amazing research! Congratulations, keep up the amazing work.
Seeing all your work led me to question, did the home release affect those reviews in any way? I know it's much harder trying to find a correlation because it'd need to be a controlled experiment, but I can't help but wonder (no pun intended) if WW84 came out in theaters it would have had significantly different reviews
Liked the analysis. I think this says that movies from which people expected better logic are punished. WW84 and Jurassic World 2 have some big logic issues
Dan out here doing the lord's work. Great research!
This is sooo interesting, thank you very much Dan!
Thanks for your research & insight, Dan!!
So interesting!!!
Matt Parker and Dan need to collaborate on their charts at some point! Dan's love of box office numbers, and Matt's love of just ANY numbers that can be put into a chart...would be awesome.
You keep coming up the game of box office analysis 👌🏽🙌❤️ Fascinating critic review cycle. I would love to hear your views on the perceived or actual boycott of Hollywood movies in China and its impact on budget and near future of Hollywood.
“Maybe they find the best in every movie just that much more” That was deep
You’re the man Dan, that’s all
This was fascinating, thank you so much! I would seriously buy a course all about this.
Loved this video. Watched the whole thing. Great stuff as always!
Hello Dan,
Long time fan and appreciate the effort you put into your videos..
I just have one suggestion for the Weekly Top 5..
Can you please provide the #Box_Office_Week_No at the bottom of each title so that it would be easy to compare the week 2 gross of The Little Things and week 10 gross of The Croods..
Also a Red/Green arrow like that of Weekly Streaming Chart would be great..
Keep up the good work Dan..!
I wonder if the rerealeses of older films might revitalize some actor's careers who might have slipped out of the cultural consciousness.
BRENDAN FRASIER!!!
I hope so.
That'd be cool.
Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping (2016) had a 97% on Embargo Day then dropped down to its current score of 79%.
Muppets Most Wanted (2014) had a score in the 30-40% range on Embargo Day but finished out at 80%.
Some movies are just weird.
Dan uploading charts early today, I love it!
"Earwig and the Witch" is a bizarre animated movie which doesn't look or feel anything like Studio Ghibli.
Theory 2: Reviews of movies that are really good or really bad tend to be more interesting to write and read, and tend to draw more readers/viewers and generate more conversation. I think there may be a slight subliminal drive that pushes reviewers to want good movies to be really good, and bad movies to be really bad. This instinct pushes initial review a little bit away from the mean.
Then, in reaction to that initial position, the most interesting kind of review is the contrarian position. One that says, "no this movie isn't as good as everyone is saying," or "this movie is actually pretty good." Following this, as buzz and interest dies down, this effect dissipates over time, and reviews tend to shift toward the middle.
Don't trust any reviews, you won't like and hate everything a reviewer does.
The reason the embargo reviews are almost always high because the pool of critics that see these movies are more like fans that are highly invested in say like the MCU, Star Wars or DCEU, so they tend to be more favourable to those movies because of the buildup and anticipation for the movie. but the critics who later review the film are not the ones who will be seeking to view the film as soon as possible so they are not as enthusiastic as the embargo reviewers so the rating slide. the ones who review post realise are mainly influenced by the post-release buzz so the can swing depending on how good the movie is and how well it has been received. people like to think that critics review or judge a movie in a vacuum but that is not the case at all. everyone who reviews films is influenced by something at every point, so reviews are always subjective.
Hi Dan! Sinister and Annabelle: Creation had a 100% rating with 21 and 15 reviews respectively. They're now at 63% and 71% respectively. I remember that being very strange...
Not sure if the Lunar New Year can be considered an "anniversary." Last year, that would-be big weekend in China was Jan 24-26. PS: Aquaman is the best DC (not just DCEU) movie ever
I stopped watching or reading critics a long time ago, for me I don't need anybody to tell me if I have to enjoy a movie or not I can decide this on my own!
"Can you trust early reviews".. as Dan has posted a review for the latest episode of WandaVision before I'm even awake. :p
Awesome video again Dan. Really good stuff
I really enjoyed it Dan, and stuck around to the end for sure. Thank you for doing all that work!
I want to be as passionate about something as Dan is about movies and numbers!
Thanks for deep dive into numbers, very informative.
This rotten tomato thing is very interesting but all time I thought about "social media" effect. 2015-2019 very influenced by facebook, twitter and all this noise. It will be great, if you can compare pre-social media and for example early 2000's reviews from same source? Thanks
You're an incredible analyst, Dan. This was excellent!
Really enjoyed this vid! Lots of great info about box office patterns and interesting theories. Thanks for all of the hard work, Dan!
Bravo sir, amazing deep dive, bravo!👏🏻
Good video to view while enjoying my lunch break. Made it to the very end, splendid job Dan.
Great video Dan, WORTH THE WAIT!! : )
I'm curious about the studio's selection process for who to give early access. My best guess is that WW84 was a case of WB picking positive critics.
It's also possible that release day reviews are likely more negative because release day theater crowds are just awful...
Great video. A deep dive into data with a slightly conspiratorial bent...and yet no raging racism or sex cult ramblings. Refreshing. Yay for conspiracy theories that don't hurt people!
Dan Murrell. The best movie guy on UA-cam